Speaking as a proper engineer, it's great to hear that software development is being approached in a more organised and structured way. Seems like MQ delivered good things, lets hope it goes on to do so for more product teams. I never bought the whole
idea that software can't be engineered anyway. It just can't be engineered by disorganised hermits who wash once a month and have forgotten how to speak.
It's refreshing to hear anyone speak who is obviously intelligent and insightful and able to put ideas over in such a clear, precise and well considered way. It's even nicer that all those inspirational qualities are in the form of a lovely Irish lady! Clearly
not a disorganised unwashed hairy hermit, and good for her.
Thanks for the clarification there. I don't mean to flame the work you've done at all - it's all sterling stuff.
I just intended to say that some people can live in a state of ignorant bliss with IPV4 NATs...not needing to be aware of how exposed the machine they are working on is.
You have to admit that NATs are a double edged sword at the moment..they do provide a large degree of protection - the burden of which is going to be passed on to the Windows firewall on the local machine once IPV6 becomes the de facto protocol.
I'm guessing at some point there's going to be a nice wizard that presents your internet footprint and vulnerabilities (built in to routers?) and accessible through Windows™ once you can make your white goods, your automatic curtain control and probably your
toilet visible on the net via an IPV6 addresses.
It's a very cool step forward..but in user land there needs to be a much better understanding of how all this works.
Right now you can run under IPV4 behind a NAT pretty much without firewall and antivirus software and survive to tell the tale. Even if you have all sorts of random services running on the local machine.
My (limited?) understanding of IPV6 is that if you have these random services running and you set the network traversal flag in the windows firewall by accident or otherwise, the world and his dog can get access. It will be like living in a network DMZ
In other words, while NATs have a serious effect on limiting connectivity we have all become comfortable with them providing an inherent degree of protection at a hardware level.
In Vista (and once NATs become IPV6 compliant) the level of protection provided is purely through that network traversal flag...a software switch...nothing more.
It's all good, but there are going to be people who trip up on this...no wonder Michael was a bit twitchy about network shares over IPV6
I have to admit that compilers are somewhat of a blackbox to me..or rather I treat them as such, it's going to take a change in perspective and a bit of thinking on my (and others i suspect) part to get the most out of this.
Very inspiring stuff though, I heard *rumours* that AMD are going to be making changes to their architecture for the "k9" that might take some of the sting out of coding parallel processing friendly apps. Is this going to be a future focus of effort between
cpu designers and compiler spcecialists?
Guess you cant talk about that though . Keep up the good work!
Thanks for this video, nice to see a fellow Scot flying the flag! I have to say this was one of the most intriguing interviews yet...and to be honest the real implications of this are eluding me somewhat.
I guess it means that...
a) you get fast response to new chip architectures - and so new platforms, probably most important for you guys with all the convergence thats going on.
b) you get more flexibility in analysing and tweaking code and introducing funky bits and bytes not handled by the source language.
c) The ability to optimise code in a bespoke manner if you are into highly specialised applications....
Are you going to be doing another interview focusing on managed code? I'd be interested to see what kind of improvements you can expect for managed code compared to C / C++.
I am looking forward to see all the changes in the charting...it's the only thing that ever bugged me seriously.
Sure i know there are a stack of third party charting packages out there but some flexible charting that you can plot up in a report without it looking totally generic would be cool to have....not technical paper quality but somewhere closer would be cool.
Guess being an engineer got me fired up about that.
You put all that work in to getting your data in a good shape...kind of nice if you can present it in a cool way too